‘MAMA Mike’ is at it again – telling New Yorkers how to live their lives. This time, he wants us to cut down on electricity. And pay a hefty price up front – for the hope of saving money down the road.

But Mayor Bloomberg’s not just offering advice; he plans to force us to live as he sees fit: i.e., frugally, over the long-term – and green.

“None of us can afford to waste money,” lectures the multibillionaire Bloomberg as he pushes his “PlaNYC 2030.”

Hizzoner points to those newfangled, long-lasting twisty light bulbs (the compact fluorescent lamp) as an example of what we should be using to save money. (As if we can’t decide for ourselves.)

The truth is, Mike’s ideas may save New Yorkers money one day – or they may not.

But shouldn’t we get to decide such things for ourselves?

Not under Hizzoner’s plans.

Like it or not, we’ll will soon be investing a hefty chunk of our spare funds in equipment that, like CFLs, will save us money (supposedly) later on. And that will let the city launch a “frontal assault” on global warming – even if no scientist in his right mind would argue that it’ll have one iota of an impact on temperatures.

What arrogance.

Last Sunday, Mama Mike cited child obesity and suggested he might go beyond his trans-fat ban by outlawing “all desserts and sweets.” OK, it was only a joke, he said. (For now . . .)

But he was absolutely serious about imposing costly “energy-efficiency” measures, forcing electricity conservation and “greening” New York.

“Our wallets [will] benefit in the long run,” Mike says, and “so will our lungs.” (Never mind the famous quip by economist John Maynard Keynes: “In the long run, we’re all dead.”) These “initiatives” will constitute “a frontal assault on the biggest challenge of all: global climate change.”

How much will it cost? Unclear. But Mayor Mike, a former securities salesman, assures us that we’ll make back the money in just a few years – and save billions “in the long run.”

Unless, of course, Keynes was right – and we’re dead by then. Or retired in Florida.

Or if economic trends, technological developments or new laws render the exercise moot.

Start with Mike’s $30-a-year surcharge on every electric bill. That’s not outrageous, even for folks who don’t have an extra $13 billion lying around.

But there’ll also be numerous hidden expenses. Like new “energy-efficiency” building-code regulations, which will boost real-estate costs. And Con Ed “upgrades” – which must be funded by rate hikes.

Is all this really necessary? Hardly. Bloomberg’s pricey plan is motivated in part by the misguided, feel-good politics of global warming.

But it also represents Team Bloomberg’s preference: no new power plants in New York City.

That’s right: Mike’s plan for accommodating a million more people by 2030 doesn’t envision a single major new plant anywhere in the city. He’ll retire, rebuild and replace old plants where they stand. He’ll seek juice from sources outside Gotham and explore the use of alternative energy.

But as for facilities at new city sites, his report says only: “Land is limited, and construction costs in New York City remain high.”

So how will Mike keep lights burning for the million newcomers? By forcing you to conserve. No matter the cost.

“Unchecked, our city’s peak electricity demand is projected to grow by 29 percent by 2030,” the report says. “We will seek to meet the entirety of this need by increasing our energy efficiency and expanding programs to manage demand . . . ”

Feel free to read that again: The needs of a million more people will be satisfied by New Yorkers learning to share – rather than by new plants.